Bill Clinton's Advice to Obama

...concerning gun ownership

*There are generations of sensitivities and defensive walls that have been constructed and nurtured by the cultural disrespect exhibited by those who do not understand nor appreciate the importance of guns in various parts of the country. Unfortunately, Obama’s words played right into these sensitivities. Indeed, the President’s ‘off the cuff’ remark to a group of supporters who, in all likelihood, shared a disrespect for rural gun owners, may have permanently waived Obama’s opportunity to take on the leadership role in any effort to engage a meaningful discussion on guns. By placing the perils of cultural disrespect and the evil of supposed moral superiority on the table, President Clinton has not only cut right to the heart of why we cannot have rational discussion of gun violence in America but identifies a polluting factor that exceeds even the damaging tactics and narratives furthered by the NRA.

Clinton says,

"Do not patronize the passionate supporters of your opponents by looking down your nose at them,” said Clinton. “A lot of these people live in a world very different from the world lived in by the people proposing these things. I know because I come from this world."

And the article continues

One simply cannot disrespect an entire culture and then seek to be the one to convince these very same people of the righteousness of making large changes to that culture in the name of the public good.*My own background is such that I simply cannot grasp why so many people want these high-powered weapons in their home. However, just because the President doesn’t get it…or I don’t get it…or you don’t get it…doesn’t make it wrong. *Millions of Americans who are continuing a tradition that is important to them cannot be deemed “wrong” when they are breaking no laws *nor harming any individual in the pursuit of what matters to them—no matter why it matters to them.

Thoughts? I think he's right, and his advice applies to anything really. Obama would be wise to listen to President Clinton.*

People wonder why the discussion about gun control is so polarizing when this is the answer. *You cannot be dismissive and insulting towards people who have done no harm, and only practice a time tested tradition. Nobody likes being insulted, especially when they have done nothing wrong. One of the reasons Clinton was successful at a lot of things and Obama isn't is because of a subtle arrogance and lack of empathy. Clinton is respected by nearly everyone because of how he treats people. He never called millions of people who support gun rights bitter partisans who cling to religion and guns.

I think it's fair to bag on the NRA; they've allotted themselves a particular level of respect and don't seem intent on changing that. As for gun owners at large, or any discussion between two opposing sides, it should be obvious that in order for progress to be made you must treat the sincere opposition with respect. When you come out swinging and calling them juvenile, arrogant, ignorant, stuck in the past, or whatever other insult you've made up, it sets an aggressive tone for the discussion, and that's not an environment for progress to be made.

It looks to me like he is using this advice. The administration hasn't disrespected any gun owners. The only things that have been said are that the checks done before someone gets a gun need to be done better, schools and mental health need looking after, and a recommendation to ban assault weapon sales and limit magazine sizes. Some other politicians have passed judgement on gun owners as crazy gun toting hicks but they are the state and local governments that conservatives love so much. The only real problem is that these people get riled up about anything he does, which he has no control over, because of Fox News spin.

The president would be smart to take advice from Clinton on how to deal with a republican legislature. Stop trying to pass huge "grand design" bills that have that one clause the republicans will scrap the whole bill for. Pass smaller bills that contain things they cant possibly vote against or they would look stupid. For example dont roll up all the gun control measures(including assault weapons ban) into one bill. Pass a bill for widespread background checks, law abiding citizens arent denied their guns and it makes sure the wrong people dont get them, no responsible person would think this is a bad idea. Same thing with law enforcement integration with the ATF/FBI so the background checks can be more thorough.

Also IDK if you can say owning a modern military style semi-auto rifle is a way of life. Owning guns, yes, but these weapons have only been around in peoples houses for 20 or so years. Their way of life would not be affected much by not having them since thee are non-assault style alternatives like semi-autos with built in magazines.

...I'm more interested in seeing how many Republicans who formerly wanted Clinton impeached will now praise him for this.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume this is your way of saying "I think that any meaningful discussion that could possibly affect any change to the gun violence situation in the United States must put aside all partisan affiliations and focus on the issue at hand, rather than becoming a divisive "us, vs. them" debate.

Originally Posted by mvallas

Well...there's the first one! ^_^

And that by this you mean "I'd like to cross that precipice, because I for one am more interested in solving the issues at hand than stroking my own ego by starting a contemptuous and irrelevant argument with people of opposing political views, since that is counterproductive and can only close peoples minds to compromise".

Being impeached for lying really has nothing to do with his perspective/thoughts on gun control.

They didnt like him because he was a democrat. They would have impeached him with anything they were able to find on him. They even spent years investigating a real estate scandal that only Hillary had any relation to just so they could find something on him. They would do the same thing to the current president but there is nothing they can dig up on him to do it. (hence all of the birther bs)

I do think the article makes a valid point, there are people who grow up with guns and some that actually need them. I also don't think a ban will do anything more than piss people off. We need to regulate who gets guns and how they are stored.

I do think the article makes a valid point, there are people who grow up with guns and some that actually need them. I also don't think a ban will do anything more than piss people off. We need to regulate who gets guns and how they are stored.

I don't have a concrete source but I remember reading an interview where he said he messed up in passing that law. It could've meant he thought it wasn't strong enough, but knowing Clinton's background I bet it was the opposite.

"It woudl be funny as hell if the abodinal snoawman walk in the background" -Confucius

"My own background is such that I simply cannot grasp why so many people want these high-powered weapons in their home. However, just because the President doesn’t get it…or I don’t get it…or you don’t get it…doesn’t make it wrong. Millions of Americans who are continuing a tradition that is important to them cannot be deemed “wrong” when they are breaking no laws nor harming any individual in the pursuit of what matters to them—no matter why it matters to them."

Over the course of the past week I have gone from being all for banning assault rifles, to not wanting to see any more rights taken away.